Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatRobGuy" data-source="post: 77668482" data-attributes="member: 123415"><p>I replied to the other user with:</p><p></p><p><em>How is it a distortion?...you go to a government website after you've waited 3 years, and they say "these are the 3 you're allowed to pick from"...and they're taking private ownership and bargaining off the table, how is that not "the government choosing"? If your number comes up, and 3 crappy ones from 1940s are all that's available, how is what I said inaccurate?</em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Here's a user doing an "AMA" about it:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]347287[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>While they still think it's an overall "excellent system", they outline some of the parts that aren't well-advertised.</p><p></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://socialhousing.wien/tools/flat-allocation-criteria[/URL]</p><p></p><p>This site links to some of their resources where you can peruse the process and the rules (if you use the google translate tool...unless you're fluent in German)</p><p></p><p>But the allocation criteria is based on more of a "to each according to his need" mindset (not surprising that their largest complex is named after, and has a big statue out front of, Karl Marx). For instance, if I as a non-married person with no kids wanted one, they would show me only the available ones, that "meet my needs" (not my wants, my needs). If you want a bigger one (that has either extra bedrooms, or more living space), you need to provide a justification for that. And I'm guessing that "well, I want a 3 bedroom because I want to have one spare room to be used as an office, and another spare bedroom for a guest room" isn't going to be an approved reason.</p><p></p><p></p><p>So, unless we're splitting hairs over vernacular here.</p><p></p><p>If I were to register, put in my household situation, they'd show me my spot on the waiting list, and when my ticket came up 2 years from now, they'd then show me the filtered list of the ones currently available, and that THEY felt were suitable for a single guy with no kids.</p><p></p><p>Would it make you feel better if I changed it to say "the government will show me a slimmed down list of the 3 available options for a 800sq ft 1bd 1ba apartments that they feel are suitable for someone in my situation" rather than "the government picks it for you"?</p><p></p><p>Like I said, I feel like that's splitting hairs.</p><p></p><p>The government saying "well, we decided you should be drinking coffee with breakfast, so here's 2 brands of coffee we'll allow you to choose from" isn't really a <em>real choice</em> if I wanted my morning beverage to be orange juice, and if the government owns 70% of the places in the city that serve breakfast (and are aiming to up that even more over the next 5 years), it limits my ability to exercise my real breakfast choice from other sources as well.</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying there's no "pros" to their system, I'm just saying that many people here aren't fully thinking through the "cons". If someone doesn't prioritize having absolute choice about where they live, and are content having an older place if it means their rent is $600 then great, sounds like they'd be a good candidate for Vienna. But that's not going to be applicable for a lot of younger people here in the US.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatRobGuy, post: 77668482, member: 123415"] I replied to the other user with: [I]How is it a distortion?...you go to a government website after you've waited 3 years, and they say "these are the 3 you're allowed to pick from"...and they're taking private ownership and bargaining off the table, how is that not "the government choosing"? If your number comes up, and 3 crappy ones from 1940s are all that's available, how is what I said inaccurate?[/I] Here's a user doing an "AMA" about it: [ATTACH type="full" alt="1715029935791.png"]347287[/ATTACH] While they still think it's an overall "excellent system", they outline some of the parts that aren't well-advertised. [URL unfurl="true"]https://socialhousing.wien/tools/flat-allocation-criteria[/URL] This site links to some of their resources where you can peruse the process and the rules (if you use the google translate tool...unless you're fluent in German) But the allocation criteria is based on more of a "to each according to his need" mindset (not surprising that their largest complex is named after, and has a big statue out front of, Karl Marx). For instance, if I as a non-married person with no kids wanted one, they would show me only the available ones, that "meet my needs" (not my wants, my needs). If you want a bigger one (that has either extra bedrooms, or more living space), you need to provide a justification for that. And I'm guessing that "well, I want a 3 bedroom because I want to have one spare room to be used as an office, and another spare bedroom for a guest room" isn't going to be an approved reason. So, unless we're splitting hairs over vernacular here. If I were to register, put in my household situation, they'd show me my spot on the waiting list, and when my ticket came up 2 years from now, they'd then show me the filtered list of the ones currently available, and that THEY felt were suitable for a single guy with no kids. Would it make you feel better if I changed it to say "the government will show me a slimmed down list of the 3 available options for a 800sq ft 1bd 1ba apartments that they feel are suitable for someone in my situation" rather than "the government picks it for you"? Like I said, I feel like that's splitting hairs. The government saying "well, we decided you should be drinking coffee with breakfast, so here's 2 brands of coffee we'll allow you to choose from" isn't really a [I]real choice[/I] if I wanted my morning beverage to be orange juice, and if the government owns 70% of the places in the city that serve breakfast (and are aiming to up that even more over the next 5 years), it limits my ability to exercise my real breakfast choice from other sources as well. I'm not saying there's no "pros" to their system, I'm just saying that many people here aren't fully thinking through the "cons". If someone doesn't prioritize having absolute choice about where they live, and are content having an older place if it means their rent is $600 then great, sounds like they'd be a good candidate for Vienna. But that's not going to be applicable for a lot of younger people here in the US. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Could Vienna’s approach to affordable housing work in California?
Top
Bottom